1 CGHC010314652026 2026:CGHC:36570 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 7509 of 2026 Naveen Manikpuri @ Lal S/o Satish Manikpuri Aged About 22 Years R/o Chunabhathi, In The House Of Dewangan, Satnamipara, Near Well, P.S. Ganj, District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House O0cer, P.S. Ganj, District - Raipur (C.G.) ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Ms. Manisha Yadav, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Saurabh Sahu, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 17.08.2026 1. This is the 3rst bail application 3led under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 189/2026 registered at Police Station- Ganj, Raipur, District Raipur, (C.G.) for the o>ence punishable under Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act, 1959. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 16.06.2026, the police of Police Station Ganj, Raipur, allegedly received secret information to the e>ect that the applicant was carrying a knife near RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 Tel Ghani Naka and was creating fear and panic amongst the members of the public. Acting upon the said information, the police reached the spot and apprehended the applicant, from whose possession an iron knife was allegedly recovered. As the applicant failed to produce any valid licence or authority for possessing the said weapon, the seized knife was taken into possession in accordance with law and, consequently, Crime No. 189/2026 was registered against the applicant at Police Station Ganj, Raipur, for the o>ences punishable under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. Hence, the present bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and that the prosecution case rests primarily upon the alleged recovery made by the police, without there being any independent or reliable evidence to corroborate the same. It is further submitted that no injury has been caused to any person by the alleged weapon and there is no allegation of its actual use resulting in any bodily harm. She further submits that the alleged weapon has already been seized and, therefore, nothing remains to be recovered from the applicant, the investigation has been completed and his custodial interrogation is no longer required. It is also submitted that, out of 07 criminal cases previously registered against the applicant, two cases have already been disposed of resulting in his acquittal, while only 3ve cases are presently pending, and therefore, no adverse inference ought to be drawn against him merely on the basis of such antecedents. She further submits that the charge-sheet has been 3 3led before the competent Court, he is in jail since 16.06.2026, and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, she prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been 3led before the competent Court. He further submits that the applicant was apprehended on the basis of credible secret information while he was allegedly carrying an iron knife near Tel Ghani Naka and creating fear amongst the members of the public. It is further submitted that the alleged weapon was recovered from the possession of the applicant and he failed to produce any valid licence or authority for possessing the same, thereby attracting the provisions of Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. He further submits that the applicant has 07 previous criminal antecedents out of which, two cases have been disposed of resulting in his acquittal, while 3ve cases are presently pending. Considering the nature of the o>ence, the material available on record and the criminal antecedents of the applicant, it is prayed that the applicant does not deserve the bene3t of bail and the application is liable to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that though the allegation against the applicant is that he was apprehended while carrying an iron knife near Tel Ghani Naka and creating fear amongst the public, without any valid licence or 4 authority for possessing the said weapon and further out of 07 criminal cases, 3ve cases are pending against the applicant, but it is to be noted that all the criminal antecedents are explained which are stated to be disposed of and pending and further considering the fact that the applicant is in jail since 16.06.2026, the charge-sheet has already been 3led before the competent Court, and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on regular bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the applicant - Naveen Manikpuri @ Lal, involved in Crime No. 189/2026 registered at Police Station- Ganj, Raipur, District Raipur, (C.G.) for the o>ence punishable under Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act, 1959, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two heavy sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall 3le an undertaking to the e>ect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 3xed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date 3xed, either personally or 5 through his counsel. In case of his absence, without su0cient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date 3xed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates 3xed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without su0cient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 8. O0ce is directed to provide a certi3ed copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan